Policy Sciences

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 275–295 | Cite as

A theoretical basis for participatory planning

  • Richard Warren Smith
Article

Abstract

Arguments are presented for the reconsideration of models which guide planning behavior and structure planning organizations. Hierarchical organizations are contrasted with reticular organizations and the latter are presented as necessary for effective citizen participation. Legitimacy is presented as a fundamental basis of justifying planning action and historical shifts in forms of legitimacy are noted. Participation, as a form of legitimacy, and several aspects of participatory planning are discussed in terms of recent systems thinking. It is argued that participatory planning increases the effectiveness and adaptivity of the planning process and contributes adaptivity and stability to the societal system. Further, it is argued that citizen participation is an essential element in making the planning process a learning system. This leads to a strengthening of the definition and role of communities in the urban system, and to an unexpected requirement of planners who would adopt a participatory planning process.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Environment and Urban Systems,Metropolitan Transportation Planning Seminars, December 1971.Google Scholar
  2. Smith, Richard Warren, “Transportation and Urban Form,” M. Arch. Thesis, M.I.T., 1966.Google Scholar
  3. Mesarovic, M. D.,The Control Of Multivariable Systems, 1960, p. 14.Google Scholar
  4. Vickers, Geoffrey,Freedom In A Rocking Boat, 1970, p. 99.Google Scholar
  5. Schutzenberger, M. P., “A Tentative Classification of Goal Seeking Behaviors,” in F. E. Emery, ed.,Systems Thinking, 1969, p. 211.Google Scholar
  6. Bower, Joseph H., “Descriptive Decision Theory From The Administrative Viewpoint,” in R. A. Bauer and K. J. Gergen, eds.The Study of Policy Formation, p. 107.Google Scholar
  7. Davidoff, Paul, “Advocacy And Pluralism In Planning,”AIP Journal (Nov. 1965), pp. 331–337; Vickers,op. cit., p. 99.Google Scholar
  8. Rein, Martin, “Social Planning: The Search For Legitimacy,”AIP Journal (July 1969), p. 237.Google Scholar
  9. Dunn, Edgar S., Jr.,Economic And Social Development, 1971, p. 92; Werner, Heinz, “The Concept Of Development From A Comparative And Organismic Point Of View,” in D. B. Harris, ed.,The Concept Of Development, 1957, p. 125.Google Scholar
  10. Mannheim, Karl,Man And Society In An Age Of Reconstruction, 1940, p. 373.Google Scholar
  11. Rein,op. cit., p. 240.Google Scholar
  12. Rein,op. cit., p. 243.Google Scholar
  13. Forrester, J. W., “Counterintuitive Behavior Of Social Systems,”Technology Review, (Jan. 1971), p. 53.Google Scholar
  14. Dunn,op. cit., p. 93.Google Scholar
  15. Mannheim,op. cit., p. 46.Google Scholar
  16. Emery, F. E. and Trist, E. L., “The Causal Texture Of Organizational Environments,” in F. E. Emery, ed.,Systems Thinking, 1969, p. 249.Google Scholar
  17. Dunn,op. cit., p. 240.Google Scholar
  18. Holland, John H., “Concerning Efficient Adaptive Systems,” in Yovits, Jacobi and Goldstein, eds.,Self Organizing Systems, 1962, p. 220.Google Scholar
  19. Buckley, Walter,Sociology And Modern Systems Theory, 1967, p. 206–207.Google Scholar
  20. Buckley,op. cit., p. 51.Google Scholar
  21. Mesarovic, M. D., D. Macko and Y. Takahara,Theory Of Hierarchical, Multilevel Systems, 1970, p. 34.Google Scholar
  22. Mesarovicet al., ibid., p. 33.Google Scholar
  23. Etzioni, Amitai,The Active Society, 1968, p. 45.Google Scholar
  24. Dunn,op. cit., p. 226.Google Scholar
  25. Ibid., p. 194.Google Scholar
  26. Likert, Rensis,The Human Organization: Its Management And Practice, 1967, pp. 156–158.Google Scholar
  27. Dunn,op. cit., p. 201.Google Scholar
  28. Mesarovicet al., op. cit., p. 50.Google Scholar
  29. Dunn,op. cit., p. 227.Google Scholar
  30. Ibid., pp. 192–3.Google Scholar
  31. Ibid., p. 231.Google Scholar
  32. Mesarovicet al., op. cit., p. 23; Dunn,op. cit., p. 203.Google Scholar
  33. Seeman, Melvin, J. M. Bishop and J. E. Grigsby,Community And Control In A Metropolitan Setting, UCLA, 1970.Google Scholar
  34. Erikson, E. H.,Identity And The Life Cycle, 1959, pp. 110–114.Google Scholar
  35. Rein,op. cit., p. 241.Google Scholar
  36. Arnstein, Sherry, “A Ladder Of Citizen Participation,”AIP Journal (July 1969), p. 221.Google Scholar
  37. White, R. W.,Ego And Reality In Psychoanalytic Theory, 1963, pp. 138, 186.Google Scholar
  38. Ibid., p. 188.Google Scholar
  39. Argyris, Chris,Understanding Organizational Behavior, 1960, pp. 8–9.Google Scholar
  40. Trist, Eric, “A Socio-Technical Critique Of Scientific Management,” a paper presented to the Conference on the Impact of Science and Technology, Edinburgh, 1970, p. 13.Google Scholar
  41. Ibid., pp. 14–15.Google Scholar
  42. McWhinney, W. H.,Not Industrial Democracy But A Reticular Society, UCLA, 1971, p. 9.Google Scholar
  43. Trist,op. cit., pp. 10–13.Google Scholar
  44. Yovits, Marshall C., G. Jacobi and G. Goldstein,Self Organizing Systems, 1962, p. ix.Google Scholar
  45. Mesarovic, M. D., “On Self-Organizing Systems,” in Yovitset al., eds.,Self Organizing Systems, 1962, p. 9.Google Scholar
  46. Mesarovic, 1960, p. 7.Google Scholar
  47. Mesarovic, 1962, p. 12.Google Scholar
  48. Mesarovicet al., 1970, p. 65.Google Scholar
  49. Ibid., p. 41.Google Scholar

Other references of general USE

  1. Alexander, Christopher (1966). “The City Is Not A Tree,”Design (January).Google Scholar
  2. Altschuler, Alan (1965).The City Planning Process. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bertalauffy, L. von (1968).General Systems Theory. New York: Braziller.Google Scholar
  4. Bolan, Richard S. (1969). “Community Decision Behavior: The Culture of Planning,”AIP Journal (September), pp. 301–310. Washington D.C.: American Institute of Planners.Google Scholar
  5. Davidoff, Paul and Linda and Gold, N. N. (1970). “Suburban Action: Advocate Planning for an Open Society,”AIP Journal (January), pp. 12–21.Google Scholar
  6. Davidoff, Paul and Reiner, T. (1962). “A Choice Theory of Planning,”AIP Journal (May), pp. 103–115. Washington, D.C.: American Institute of Planners.Google Scholar
  7. Dewey, John (1934).A Common Faith. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Dewey, John (1943). “Development of American Pragmatism”, in D. D. Runes, eds.,Twentieth Century Philosophy. New York: Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
  9. Dyckman, John W. (1969). “The Practical Uses of Planning Theory,”AIP Journal, (September), pp. 298–300.Google Scholar
  10. Emery, F. E. (1969).Systems Thinking. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  11. Emery, F. E. (1969). “The Historical Validity of the Industrial Democracy Project,” mimeo, April.Google Scholar
  12. Garvey, James E. (1963).Self-Organizing Systems, Washington.Google Scholar
  13. Henderson, Hazel (1971). “The Computer in Social Planning,”The Master in Business Administration, (December), p. 14.Google Scholar
  14. Hughes, James and Mann, L. (1969). “Systems and Planning Theory,”AIP Journal, (September), pp. 330–333.Google Scholar
  15. Keyes, Langley C., Jr. and Teitcher, E. (1970). “Limitations of Advocacy Planning: A View from the Establishment,”AIP Journal, (July), pp. 225–226.Google Scholar
  16. Lindblom, Charles (1965).The Intelligence of Democracy. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  17. Marcuse, H. (1964).One Dimensional Man. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  18. McWhinney, W. H. (1971).Phenomenarchy: A Suggestion for Social Redesign. Graduate School of Management, UCLA (June).Google Scholar
  19. McWhinney, W. H. (1968). “Organizational Form, Decision Modalities and the Environment,”Human Relations, pp. 269–281.Google Scholar
  20. Meier, Richard L. (1962).A Communications Theory of Urban Growth, Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Merton, Robert K. (1968).Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  22. Mesarovic, M. D. (1968).Systems Theory and Biology. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Peattie, Lisa R. (1970). “Drama and Advocacy Planning,”AIP Journal (November), pp. 409–410.Google Scholar
  24. Wiebenson, John (1969). “Planning and Using Resurrection City,”AIP Journal (November), pp. 405–411.Google Scholar
  25. Wiener, Norbert (1961).Cybernetics: Or, Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company 1973

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Warren Smith
    • 1
  1. 1.Berkeley

Personalised recommendations